| Kasz216 said:
For example, people in the US don't like government run healthcare, because they don't like healthcare rationing, which is a halmark of every government healthcare system. It's how the prices stay down.
B) As for that congressman and lobbyiest article. I'm guessing it came from a reporter or source who COMPLETELY MADE IT UP. There is literally no other legitamite explination for such a conversation to go on, let alone infront of a news reporter... and if it did, they would of published said persons name and had a career making story. The fact that you can't find it on the interenet more or less proves it's fake.
C) Politicians don't always vote in the best interest of their consituents because we live in a democracy. Congressmen more often then not adopt most of the stances of the people they represent. 75% of the time If people DON'T want to do something you'd see as better, it's simply because they don't want to do it. Not because they're ignorant of other options or just aren't informed. For the things you mentioned I could name a number of reasons the public thinks the costs outway the advantages. I don't agree with them, but there are plenty of persuasive reasons.
They just have a different opinion on what they see as best. Popularity follows position changes, not vice versa... whenever public policy shifts, so to will politician positions... no the other way around. Though often times public sentiment makes it seem otherwise. The rest of that time is generally just issues the general populace doesn't care that much about one way or another or in general deal making. You need to vote for things important to other senators to get your stuff passed. |
I'll have to try and find that article. If anything, I'm probably misremembering the details of what happened, because I'm pretty skeptical of anything too shocking I find on the internet, giving the amount of BS that goes around about both sides, so the article itself should be legitimate, even if my recounting of it is not.
And I think that skepticism I have towards information abotu both sides ties into why I'm so unwililngly to accept what you're saying here. Based on my own political evolution, and that of a number of my friends, as well as the political rigidity of peopel like my dad, I can't help but feel that the influence of larger media and political talking points is being undersold here. My politics were starkly different four years ago than they are now as was the politics of many of my friends, but we all had a gradual shift as we began to learn that much of what we told by single-party affiliated media conglomerates was made up, disingenious, taken out of context, bullshit. We all become much more skeptical of what we were hearing from various sources as we learned much of it simply wasn't true.
People like my father are still trapped all up in it, believing simultaneously, for example, that Obama is a godless socialist out to sell us out to the Soviet Union (which doesn't even exist!) and that Obama is a closeted Muslim intending to implement Sharia law. When I explain to him the logic behind right wing and left wing ideals, he tends to lean left, but when I ask him who he's voting for, it all goes back to "getting that bastard out of office!" And then look at all the fearmongering about Obama planning to take away our guns or Obama doing everything he can to prevent drilling, neither of which are backed up by reality.
I guess anecdotes are just anecdotes, but the idea that political parties and corporations don't have a significant sway over their constituents directly contrasts much of what I've experienced in life. And it would make the entire prospect of negative political campaigning pointless.
